Messages

[simultaneously]

Can you visualise something else than the environnement you see during the projection?
I mean simultaneously, like we do in the waking state when one can see with his eyes and think of something else and represent othet things in his mind.

I am new to this, I had quite a few spontaneous projection experiences, but what I'm wondering is if those who can project more or less at will, have tested the objectivity of their experiences?

The simplest test would be to ask someone to write something unknown to the projector on a piece of paper and to put it on some place known by the projector (next room) and to test if you can read what is actually written when you project.
Such test would be the absolute test of reality of OBE experiences (ie. not imagination/controled hallucination).

Did anyone actually do that, or some similar objectivity test?

The reason I'm mentioning this is that the continuity of consciousness in the waking state seems to be maintained by a state of dissociation, where thoughts always refer to something else than what is immediately percieved. In dreams or projections, one seems to be swallowed by the perception, which tends to naturally lead to a dream state without a stable system of references that maintains continuity.

There could be a basis for reflection about how to maintain continuity in a projection or a lucid dream.

quote:Originally posted by michael

we haveI agree to explain why NO-ONE and I mean no-one has ever successfully done an OBE and achieved a target under laboratory conditions..I know all about Charles tarts' one in 1967 with a subject but it is not entirely scientifcally viable.i KNOW that I amd thousands other really do get OBE but we are owe a legitiamte explanation as to why we have not proven it objectively...

Well, the first question is WHO was tested, are they people who "routinely perform RT projections" and to whom a RT projection would be as simple as walking out the room, or were they occasional projectors with limited control.

I must say on the other hand that if I was such expert RT projector who has proven to HIMSELF the objectivity of RT projections by an OBJECTIVITY test such as reading, I would personally think twice about submitting myself to tests and proving the "paranormal" to the world.
On the other hand, there are people who actively write books that promote astral projection in which they describe themselves as experts.
So if they already try to convince people that projection is real, they would probably not feel discomfort at the thought of actually proving such a thing.

quote:Originally posted by michael

When I first started projecting I suggested to the Institute ofpsychophysical research in oxford that they set up a 5 digit number for me to attempt to get via an OBE (This was in 1967).
They agreed to do this.
Over the next few years NOTHING.
I never managed despite trying.
OBE's only happned in the vicinity of my bedroom.
Uncontrolled.
I do not know why.
But I KNOW I was out of the body every time I managed the dozens of times I did.
BUT I could never provide "objective" proof.
The onus is on me to explain that or get advice etc from others as to why.
We cannot duck out of providing "objective" proof though or at least explain in a valid way why it has not been provided yet.

Ah, at last a concrete answer and not a flood of questionable personal beliefs.
Could I ask you to clarify certain details.

- You say that the Institute of psychophysical research did set up a 5 digits number. You also said that astral projection happened only in the vicinity of your bed.
Do you mean that the number was set up far away from your room and you could not project to that place but could stay only in your room?

Do you think that you could read a number that would be placed in your room but that you couldn't see from your bed, on the top of some surface above you?

Of course, that wouldn't be a proof to others, unless they observe you all the time when you make the attempt, but that would be a proof for yourself.

But I would be interested to hear from people who can do RT projection as a matter of routine. Are there such people here?

quote:Originally posted by astralspinner



It has, in fact, been demonstrated scientifically that the part of the brain that allows us to read doesn't function when we're asleep, dreaming, or in a trance. That's why it's so difficult to read numbers & words when OOB - instead of our brain doing it all for us, we have to try and do it all by ourselves.

I heard that theory, but it doesn't seem to work for me because in my dreams I read on a regular basis, and big chunks of text, not just short sentences.

I would point out that Astral projections are not supposed to be dreams if they are objective (ie. not just dreams)

But you are right, objectivity tests don't have to involve texts. It can be cards (and the subject doesn't have to know that it will be a card), symbols, unknown objects, whatever, more unknown in advance the better.

I would just like to answer to the poster who used the irrelevant argument that it's all subjective because of scientific theories suggesting that consciousness is a reflux of memories or something.
Fine, but that applies also to the awaken walking state, and in the walking state you can do an objectivity test, you just walk to the piece of paper and read it. By "miracle" it is the same text written by the guy who wrote it!

I must say that this picture:
http://img37.exs.cx/img37/7451/000_1787.jpg
looks remarquably like the circular interference light patterns that you can sometimes see when your eyes are semi closed and direct sunlight goes under a certain angle trough your eyelashes.

Similar interference patterns when you look trough some microscopes (old and preferably with party dirty optics).

So do you see the orbs with naked eyes first and then trough the camera or do you search them with the camera?

quote:Originally posted by upstream:  
There is no distinct difference. In fact, even at now "we are in our heads" and "out of our body" meaning that we don't perceive the objective reality as it is. According to Rudolfo Llinas (...) of that could separate shared dreamings from real astral projections.

So I take it that you never tested the objective reality of your projections then?

Now let's hear from people with a modicum of common sense?

First I must underline that I was talking about an "objectivity test" not a test about the nature of OBEs.

That means that the test is about the question if there is objective reality in the phenomenon, not about the nature of the phenomenon.

That means that all those who embarked into a discussion ESP versus true projection missed the point completely, which is strange since the extremely simple test I was suggesting (reading an unknown text from a piece of paper) clearly wasn't about the discrimination between ESP and projection, but evidently about determining if there is "a" objective reality in the phenomenon.

Now, lets return to the topic.

I note that only a handful seem to acknowledge the obviousness of the interest in such objectivity test. Only one person present seems to have tried such test but unfortunately didn't succeed.

Lots of philosophizing about the subjective nature of OBEs of the type: "it's all subjective and two projectors can be in the same place but have totally different experiences".
Well, the question is precisely if they are in the same (objective)place or just in their heads having peculiar hallucinations (ESP or projection alike).

The "reading test" is to establish that there is an objective reality to the phenomenon (it doesn't matter if one would be projected to a real place or retrieving info by ESP from a real place/object - the piece of paper)


I wonder if some more experienced projectors did some test of this kind or would feel confident that they could succeed?
Perhaps Robert Bruce himself could answer that question?

True, true. However, my question stays.